Romance and friendship?

[Jasede]

Edit: removed

Edited October 15, 2012 by Jasede

[USER47]

I think all that hate for romances is caused by the fact they are usually really badly writen and awkward (especially Bioware writers suck at this). I don't see a problem with believable tasteful romance/sex options, since building relationships of various kinds is part of a human nature and neglecting romances altogether lowers your roleplaying options and motivations quite significantly.

[Jasede]

You started out so well but you lost me at "tasteful sex options". Is that you, Volourn?

[USER47]

What's wrong with tasteful sex options? Do you consider all books/movies with sex included to be distasteful? When it's well written, it can be completely natural part of PC's relationship with NPC/companion.

[Tale]

I would have been behind you if you hadn't said that. I can't think of a single book I've seen or movie I've read that had a tasteful sex scene.

 

Scratch that. Spy thriller movies. Those aren't bad. They're not memorable either, except Xenia Onatopp.

[USER47]

It doesn't have to be fully described or pictured "sex scene", for christ's sake.

 

But you have sexualy active characters in almost every story from the beginning of mankind and it often makes those stories and character motivations more believable...

[Jarmo]

For me, it sort of depends on the kind of companions you have and the kind of game it is.

 

Fallout 2, no, didn't feel the need to try to romance Sulik, or Vic, or Cassidy. Had I been playing as a woman and actually being a woman, well.. maybe.

There was a brothel, hey go for it! There were bishops women, go for it! All is cool.

 

Fallout: NV on the other hand. I'm traveling with this hot Rose Cassidy babe who downs bottles like crazy, and I'm never given a chance to say anything about it?

A bit of drunken fumbling would have been just right for the theme, and If I'd have tried to talk further she'd tell me to go #%€$** myself.

But I'd guess that's bethesda giving the guidance (much better than bio by just focusing on combat?)

 

Bio and Black Isle soon realized if you want to tell the story with as complete characters as possible, you just can't ignore relationships.

Out of place if you just want a tactical combat game with puzzles, necessary otherwise.

 

One could argue BG1 was the last good rpg game made, and if that's the position, I have no counter.

One could argue a whole lot of things with "and that's a fact" opinions, but they're just opinions and wrong ones at that.

[rjshae]

They're obviously not going to show sex scenes, but perhaps a watercolor bedroom illustration with a little sonnet from the bard would do? Gives the mood at least.

[Jasede]

Perhaps there could also be a collectible sex card so you can remember your exploits. And an achievement for catching them all. STDs, that is.

[Osvir]

So you think it should be a dating sim rather than an RPG to do romances.Glad we agree.

 

No, I want it to be an interesting deep part of the game (if included), not it's own game. Don't worry! People seem to misunderstand my posts, you're not the only one. I also wish to discuss the matter and try to communicate and work something out (if there are any possibilities to make it better), which makes me wonder why I'm even replying to you...

 

---

 

How to make it interesting, that's an entirely different thing... I really like Beowulf's "romance", as well as Tristan & Isolde. Greek mythology/History generally has some pretty harsh but deep interesting romance portrayals that I think games should try towards a bit more if anything

 

But as I said, and re-capping, 1 or 2 romances should be enough as well as a "data template". The deeper it is, the deeper the modders can do it ofc.

[mr.Ermac]

Why is it so important to some people to look at pixels "tastefully" carressing other pixels? There's no such thing as a tastefull sex scene. They way bioware did it at first with ME1 was sort of fine, but when people complained they need more 3D cleavage they caved and catered to people who really should get out more instead of spending hours gazing at Liara's model in UT Viewer. I am all for well made romances, even if the outcome of it is that I don't "get" with said interest. It is an interesting outcome that not many game companys would go for since they always need to cater to the masses. If you want a different roleplaying experience accept the fact that like in real life (lol) a roleplaying game might provide you with an outcome that you do not necessarilly like, but is the direct result of your actions. That said, I can also live without romances in a game, its not really that essential. Even striking an interesting friendship with your companions is enough. I always like the way romance was handled in Planescape. It really isn't a thing, but its something that develops through the characters' interaction. I say stick to your guns MCA and whoever will have to write romances.

Edited October 15, 2012 by mr.Ermac

[GarfunkeL]

Absolutely no. You freaks already have your mass-market virtual "relationship" simulators with Bioware games. Start playing japanese dating sims if you need more virtual relationships with nuance and drama and "tasteful" sex.

 

Deep characterisations for companions - yes, absolute.

Virtual **** puppets you can dress up and validate your lonely basement-dwelling existence - hell no.

[Morality Games]

Absolutely no. You freaks already have your mass-market virtual "relationship" simulators with Bioware games. Start playing japanese dating sims if you need more virtual relationships with nuance and drama and "tasteful" sex.

 

Deep characterisations for companions - yes, absolute.

Virtual **** puppets you can dress up and validate your lonely basement-dwelling existence - hell no.

 

Problem is that the two Black Isle/Obsidian games with famously deep characterizations had romance, although the form and style differed from Bioware's.

 

The reason being because romance can add another layer of depth to a relationship.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Morality Games

[Osvir]

Absolutely no. You freaks already have your mass-market virtual "relationship" simulators with Bioware games. Start playing japanese dating sims if you need more virtual relationships with nuance and drama and "tasteful" sex.

 

Deep characterisations for companions - yes, absolute.

Virtual **** puppets you can dress up and validate your lonely basement-dwelling existence - hell no.

 

That's the thing, it isn't about the humping or pumping, I'm with you on that I'd not want the diaper action. It's about the depth, that's what I personally want. This can be achieved with or without romances, with romance you just go one step further.

 

Love is common in stories, in many forms (friendship is a form of love <3 and on that, I like you ). I feel that Lord of the Rings does this well too, without the above. We can leave our imagination to what our "love mates" do after the game. That's a private thing. However, "seax sells" as I saw Sawyer say on Formspring. I agree with him. That doesn't mean I believe it should be exploited.

 

Also, for those who want romance, please don't be agitated or affected by the obvious provocation we see in this thread.

 

2nd EDIT: For you who do not want romance, please don't be agitated or affected by the obvious provocation we see in this thread. If you think "to have romance in the game" is a provocation by itself you are not attacking the game, you are attacking people's opinions... which is just sad to see, even if that's not what you intend.

 

This video is great :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuStsFW4EmQ

 

EDIT: I have yet to see a comment from someone who is against who could imagine a "better" way (except the obvious and common "The better way is to be without romance" which the topic isn't about). I feel we are on these forums to dicuss "How can you do it better?" not "How can you do it without?".

 

That is actually something I haven't seen either, how can you do better with companions without romance? Ideas for friendship? Ideas for "inter-party conflict and/or harmony"?

 

In-party banters and mechanics that enhances the game experience (with or without the love thing). A party member dies, will he be mourned or ridiculed? Does the party members sit in the tavern and laugh at how they destroyed the dragon? I want a novel, personally, a rich story with depth. If the characters come to life, I am sure that the story will be even greater (Planescape: Torment is probably the best game up to date that I can think of that, where the characters were their own characters, whilst in Baldur's Gate they were my "Tactical Party Members" so I could defeat a boss or whatnot).

 

However, in Baldur's Gate (and Icewind Dale for that matter) I create my own romances and friendships by the power of imagination which works really well too and is a great approach as well. I guess I am like, another poster above, split on this matter.

 

I'd love to get a comment from Adam Brennecke when he has finished Icewind Dale 2 (I doubt it, and I think it should be something Obsidian discuss amongst themselves), what he feels about this from his own "scientific" view.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Osvir

[evdk]

Absolutely no. You freaks already have your mass-market virtual "relationship" simulators with Bioware games. Start playing japanese dating sims if you need more virtual relationships with nuance and drama and "tasteful" sex.

 

Deep characterisations for companions - yes, absolute.

Virtual **** puppets you can dress up and validate your lonely basement-dwelling existence - hell no.

 

Problem is that the two Black Isle/Obsidian games with famously deep characterizations had romance, although the form and style differed from Bioware's.

 

The reason being because romance can add another layer of depth to a relationship.

 

What games?

[LadyCrimson]

My opinion is I'd rather the focus just be on creating multiple characters with great stories/personalities, where players may find attachment ('crush') to one or more because you like that personality ... and then use your own imagination to create the rest of romance, if you want one. I don't always want it all spelled out for me, where my own imagination may be stepped on by some crude writing or silly fade to black or poorly animated bedroom scene.

 

Games can offer a framework for inspiring romantic imagination, but I don't think they're a very good format for actually providing a fully fleshed out, interesting, and complex romantic plot line. My own imagination is always better anyway.

[GarfunkeL]

That's the thing, it isn't about the humping or pumping, I'm with you on that I'd not want the diaper action. It's about the depth, that's what I personally want. This can be achieved with or without romances, with romance you just go one step further.

 

Love is common in stories, in many forms (friendship is a form of love <3 and on that, I like you ). I feel that Lord of the Rings does this well too, without the above. We can leave our imagination to what our "love mates" do after the game. That's a private thing. However, "seax sells" as I saw Sawyer say on Formspring. I agree with him. That doesn't mean I believe it should be exploited.

 

Aslo, for those who want romance, please don't be agitated or affected by the obvious provocation we see in this thread.

I agree with you but the people who make this threads and clamor for relationships are not looking for a chaste succubus but something that they have gotten used to with Bioware games. I fully trust MCA to write great characters who can become friends or even flirt with the PC. What Troika pulled off with Heather in VtM:BL was simply awesome. Something along that line I wouldn't have a problem with at all. But honestly, as I said, the sort of people who feel strongly enough this issue to keep making these romance threads are not satisfied with that. They want to bring their XXX-rated fanfiction into the game and Obsidian needs to see that such demands are in a small minority.

 

My opinion is I'd rather the focus just be on creating multiple characters with great stories/personalities, where players may find attachment ('crush') to one or more because you like that personality ... and then use your own imagination to create the rest of romance, if you want one. I don't always want it all spelled out for me, where my own imagination may be stepped on by some crude writing or silly fade to black or poorly animated bedroom scene.

 

Games can offer a framework for inspiring romantic imagination, but I don't think they're a very good format for actually providing a fully fleshed out, interesting, and complex romantic plot line. My own imagination is always better anyway.

Again, agreed there. Heck, give me good gameplay, the companionship between my party members will come out of my imagination during the game by itself. I don't need awkward, spoon-fed romance.

Edited October 15, 2012 by GarfunkeL

[Jasede]

Absolutely no. You freaks already have your mass-market virtual "relationship" simulators with Bioware games. Start playing japanese dating sims if you need more virtual relationships with nuance and drama and "tasteful" sex.

 

Deep characterisations for companions - yes, absolute.

Virtual **** puppets you can dress up and validate your lonely basement-dwelling existence - hell no.

 

Problem is that the two Black Isle/Obsidian games with famously deep characterizations had romance, although the form and style differed from Bioware's.

 

The reason being because romance can add another layer of depth to a relationship.

 

What games?

 

Probably MotB and PS:T. They're Avellone "romances" though. So they're really tragedies that aren't offensive. They were written to pretty much punish those looking for virtual love/sex because our good Lord and savior Avellone famously hates the romances we all loathe.

[evdk]

 

Probably MotB and PS:T. They're Avellone "romances" though. So they're really tragedies that aren't offensive. They were written to pretty much punish those looking for virtual love/sex because our good Lord and savior Avellone famously hates the romances we all loathe.

 

Played both of those games and actually don't remember much romancing going on, so the games must have done it right.

[Jasede]

Yep, they did. There is definitely romance in them but it's not the romance we're raging about. It's just MCA creating his world and characters and sometimes, love is a part of them. But it's that MCA kind of love: the ideal, along with all the tragedy. It's perfect and inoffensive because it's part of the world and the narrative, and written well to boot.

[BSoda]

This doesn't appear to be a high value conversation.

 

Some people aren't so bad, but then the trolls come charging out from beneath the bridge.

The trolls that are challenging the moratorium on romance threads? Yeah, ****ing bastards.

With Chris A's statement on the issue (and a mod in this very thread saying so) there is no moratorium anymore...though some ppl obviously work overtime to rectify that :-/

[Jasede]

That's a shame.

[mr.Ermac]

Really, what we can all agree on is that it is important to have interesting character relationships. A romance might be a plus in some cases, but no over-the-top bioware style "gotta hit that space tang" thing. Of course you can always add a 4 million stretch goal for a brothel. I think that would see a nice spike in funding.

[Tale]

Probably MotB and PS:T. They're Avellone "romances" though. So they're really tragedies that aren't offensive. They were written to pretty much punish those looking for virtual love/sex because our good Lord and savior Avellone famously hates the romances we all loathe.

I don't think Avellone wrote Safiya. It wasn't tragedy either way.

[evdk]

Probably MotB and PS:T. They're Avellone "romances" though. So they're really tragedies that aren't offensive. They were written to pretty much punish those looking for virtual love/sex because our good Lord and savior Avellone famously hates the romances we all loathe.

I don't think Avellone wrote Safiya. It wasn't tragedy either way.

Unless it was and she got eaten by One of Many.